National capping

O

onionpeel

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2003
Messages
514
Reaction score
0
Location
Auckland
Definition of a rumour: A story with more tales than an octopus.
That being said, the talk in the ivory towers of Telkom is that of a national cap for adsl *could* be on the way.
Let me repeat (before you take out your assasination kit):
It's a rumour, as you know, where there is smoke, there's a fire![?]
 
I can only assume that it means that if the <b>collective</b> traffic of all ADSL users nationally passes a particular threshold - then everyone's traffic slows down, as opposed to current individual caps...??
 
Yip - when we as a nation have used to much of "their" precious Internet connectivity they give us the finger collectively! Bloody ridiculess!

I find it very hard to keep a civil tone when it comes to these folks @ Telkom! But believe me they will get what's coming to them - I cannot wait for the day that the industry becomes deregulated - I truly hope they shrink through customer attrition and become the 3rd rate company they are and deserve to be....
 
that'll be terrible - if a few people decide that there gonna download as much as they want from the beginning of the month then everyone could be capped in a few days. I hope thise is just a rumour
 
I was under the impression (from my source) that each ADSL account would have a national cap as well. What was also mentioned was possibly no connectivity at all once the cap had been reached.
Again, this is (a) rumour (b) open to interpretation.
 
If this is the case, then the product shouldn't be called ADSL because its definately not what ADSL is. They should rename it to TDSL (Telkoms' Disgustingly Sh*t Line)!!
 
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Quazzi</i>
<br />If this is the case, then the product shouldn't be called ADSL because its definately not what ADSL is. They should rename it to TDSL (Telkoms' Disgustingly Sh*t Line)!!
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">


ahahaahahahaha Good one :)


----------------
United we stand!
----------------
 
TDSL - LoL - good one - very apt.
 
[xx(] If this rumor is true and Telkom would give no connectivity after cap, then to hell with ADSL.
Not worth the money...64k line better.
Also the people who signed up initially before any of these changes would take place, should collectivley sue Telkom to hold them to their original agreement. They cannot just do what they want with our service. If I agreed to pay for ADSL with certain conditions on Telkoms part to deliver service, then that is what I will get.
If this rumor is true than Telkom better give all existing ADSL subscribers warning months before hand. What about all these damn pots routers we bought from Telkom? That is alot of money to be wasted on a service that will no longer be given under these new conditions. I would want my money back for these routers from Telkom.
 
What would we prefer more; an ADSL service that slows down for everybody because of congestion or one where everybody is capped so that everyone has a fair share of the bandwidth when they require it.

National capping does make sense when the network has come to a point where it is getting saturated. It would be scary if we are already at that point.

It once again re-iterates my point that ASDL should be charged for on a "data used" basis so that low bandwidth users doesn't have to subsidize the high bandwidth users. On this basis we will have much more fairness in the system and undue congestion shouldn't occur so easily. [8D]
 
I disagree with this point of view completely! Per usage charging is a tactic generally used by ISP's to maxamise revenue.

When I buy access to the Net I want a pipe that has a guarantee on throughput, uptime, latency and support. If the ISP supplies me a with access it's my bandwidth - regardless of how much traffic I push in either direction.... Also contention ratio's must be stipulated. That way one can calculate what would be best & worst case throughput if you are in a class. 1:1 access means there IS NO CONTENTION with the factor dropping by when the contention ratio goes to 1:2 etc etc

A network is inefficient if the usage is below the threshold where packetloss occurs. i.e. an idle circuit is WASTE. A cap has nothing to do with network efficiency - it's a way to charge for traffic REGARDLESS of how efficient the network is. If the International link is oversubscribed to the point of being inefficient it wouldn't matter if you are capped or not - everybody would get poor service as the link would not be able to handle the traffic effeciently.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">What would we prefer more; an ADSL service that slows down for everybody because of congestion or one where everybody is capped so that everyone has a fair share of the bandwidth when they require it.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

capped in the above context would refer to throughput in kbps NOT amount transferred....
 
Hi ASF,

Read the rest of my posting and see if we differ. My argument is that the Telkom basic model is wrong and because of that they are implementing capping. In their model it is essential because there is no such thing as unlimited bandwidth.

I agree with you on the rest completely and if Telkom was willing to spend money on equipment or maybe just to understand the equipment they already have, they can offer such a service. ADSL service is based on statistical rather than discreet number due to the fact that packets are random entities. Leased lines uses discreet portions of bandwidth and their consumption of network bandwidth in the operators network is fixed.

There may be users that won't like packetloss and this mechanism must be explained in a SLA. In Frame Relay for instance you may kick of lower priority users to maintain the throughput for high priority ones. The problem is that Telkom hasn't got any SLA, no guarantee and no measure of fairness for all. That is why they only have the capping mechanism to introduce some kind of control. A SLA will obviously differ between users and there is no point to ask somebody with a lesser service to subsidize somebody else.

An overcongested network will give everybody a bad service and if Telkom is there already they have to take drastic measures. If they are running idle, it won't make sense at all. The point is, if congestion is caused by some users being on all the time and using the maximum available bandwidth and others get a mediocre service when they occasionally access it, there is definitely no fairness. Whether by SLA or by capping, some control must exist.
 
Absolutley - there has to be control. One cannot have a network that is uncontrolled - that's just technical chaos.

What they actually want is traffic MANAGEMENT - i.e. where you can place users in classes and allocate QoS accordingly. I feel that as an ADSL user I was sold broadband access - therefore I would expect as close to 1:1 contention on local access. Mabey a little overenthusiastic but anyway - as fast as possible locally - after all local bandwidth is cheap compared to International - and even more so when you consider that Telkom OWN the entire infrastructure. There is a reasonalbe amount of backbone fibre in SA and we all know the amount of capacity that fibre can carry.

As to International - I understand that they have a problem. It's a premuim connection - however they should at least afford everybody a level of QoS. Mux 50 users into a segment of capacity - no problem with that - when the mux class is full everybody gets poor access - but conversely when the class is empty it's lightning for the lucky devil thats pushing / pulling packets.

The point I was trying to make it that technically a "cap" on amount of traffic used is actually useless in trying to manage a network. What makes me think that Telkom is being greedy is that at the start of the month when everyone is uncapped there is no congestion problems - which, if it occured would indicate an overutilised network. The fact that all ADSL users get good throughput before the traffic cap is an indication that there is no problem with raw capacity on the network - rather a greed factor to squeeze as much revenue out of users as possible - let alone the "control" factor - who the hell are THEY to port prioritise etc. It's pure BS from an ignorant monopolistic telco provider living in the past...
 
Assuming Telkom has 10 000GB available per month - how best to sell it ??

<font color="blue">a. Give 1GB to every existing user</font id="blue">
<b>TELKOM INCOME = zippo</b>

<font color="blue">b. Sell 3333 additional 3GB accounts</font id="blue">
<b>TELKOM INCOME = 3333 x R185.00 = R616 605.00</b>

<font color="blue">c. Give nothing to existing users and stop additional accounts.</font id="blue">
Sign-up 10 000 new users who will obey and use 1GB per month
<b>TELKOM INCOME = 10 000 x R(680.00 +185.00) = R 8 650 000.00</b>

Now if you were a monopoly and you were Telkom which would be your choice ??
 
I think we are now all back in agreement! The problem lies with the way Telkom offered this service from the beginning. If you have worked with Telkom for a while (with not "for") you will realise that they employ a lot of people for political reasons, not for technical ability. Don't think I am talking affirmative action either, I am talking of plain politics.

Telkom doesn't want things to be complicated and the easy part is that they don't need too. They are a monopoly and why would a monopoly study equipment and sell specialised services if they don't need too. ADSL was just offered due to public pressure. They are still wondering how "us monkeys" ever found out about this technology. Remember, they are the only ones that know these things. They don't see a public that knows about Broadband, "Always On", QoS etc. If you deal with them you will realise that I speak the truth. I have written a lot about this before and I don't want to repeat myself all of the time. But at this point Telkom wanted the sophisticated user to ask for ISDN and ADSL would have been a service that would utilise the high speed in the local loop to suck "Video on demand" from the local exchange from local "Video on Demand" service providers. That would have left them free to sell their bandwidth more expensively to "more sophisticated" users.

The cellular operators probably understand these technologies bettter but even they are offering a mediacre and very expensive service. My cellular service provider for instance charge me over R20 for a Mbyte "always on" GPRS service which never stays "always on". I can't even download my email properly before another R20 is due.
 
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by ckleynhans</i>
<br />
The cellular operators probably understand these technologies bettter but even they are offering a mediacre and very expensive service. My cellular service provider for instance charge me over R20 for a Mbyte "always on" GPRS service which never stays "always on". I can't even download my email properly before another R20 is due.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Remember that the cell companies are more or less in the same situation as we are. They are only licensed to provide that last mile, in other words the signal from the cell base station to the cell phone. All comunication between base stations etc. are done on telkom 2mbs lines which they have to rent from Telkom.

If Telkom could give them a cheaper service, then that cost savings would probably go to us the users
 
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by bacchus</i>
If Telkom could give them a cheaper service, then that cost savings would probably go to us the users
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I work for one. They print money in the basement!!![:D][:D][:D]
 
<font face="Book Antiqua">For interest sake get your hands on this months PC Format October issue. It has an article with an interview of Steven White.
He recieves several questions pertaining to ADSL and I was pretty <b>######!</b> upset with his attitude towards the users of this service[}:)]</font id="Book Antiqua">
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X